Quote:
|
Originally Posted by manasecret
Personally for the life of me I can't figure out what the hoopla about a Dubai company owning parts of these ports is. It's just like the Cheney shooting. I thought everyone would have a good laugh for a couple days and then the news would be over. Instead, I was still seeing headlines two friggin' weeks after. WTF????? Who cares???????
Sorry, off topic. But this is similar, no one article can explain to me why this Dubai deal makes any difference about national security. As far as I can tell, this port company has no say in the security of the ports. So what difference does it make who owns it? Dubai isn't Iran afterall.
|
I'm not against the United Arab Emirates, owners of Dubai PW, owning rights to the ports because they are a security risk or even because they are "bad" nation. I'm against it because the UAB would own the rights by proxy through their company and no other
country should be able to run anything as important as our ports.
As for security, it is an issue as well, but I think one that can be resolved. Here are the issues I have with UAB concerning security:
1) UAB has some very shady dealings in its recent past (last 10-20 years) in dealing with terrorist organizations. Whether or not a few hijackers came from UAB is not my concern; thats like saying a haystack is a pile of needles because you found a needle in it. Instead my concern is over belief that UAB laundered money for terrorist organizations and has basically enabled them for a long time. Whether or not this is factual, I don't know, but they are pretty serious accusations that deserve to be addressed.
2) While Dubai will not be in control of security, they will be intimately involved with the security forces. They will know coast guard schedules and security routines and methods. Information is just as dangerous as action if you are dealing with terrorist organizations that would like nothing more than to intimidate a country into divulging such info.